An Experimental Comparison of the Impact of ‘Warning’ and ‘Health Star Rating’ FoP Labels on Adolescents’ Choice of Breakfast Cereals in New Zealand

Abstract

This research investigated the performance of the red, octagonal Vienna Convention traffic ‘STOP’ sign as a front of pack (FoP) warning nutritional label. While the Vienna Convention traffic light system is an established FoP label, the potential of the ‘STOP’ sign in the role has not been investigated. The performance of the ‘STOP’ label was compared with that of a single star (low nutritional value) Australasian Health Star Rating (HSR) label using a fractionally replicated Latin square design. The labels were presented on choice diads of cold breakfast cereal packets. The sample of 240 adolescents aged 16–18 was drawn from a secondary school in the South Island of New Zealand. A large and significant main effect was observed at the p < 0.01 level for the difference between the ’STOP’ sign and the control condition (no nutritional FoP label), and at p < 0.05 for the difference between the HSR and the ‘STOP’ label. There was no significant difference between the HSR FoP and the control condition. A significant non-additivity (interaction) (p < 0.01) was also observed via the fractional replication. The results indicate that the Vienna Convention ‘STOP’ sign is worthy of further research with regard to its potential as an FoP nutritional label.

An Experimental Study Evaluating the Influence of Front-of-Package Warning Labels on Adolescent’s Purchase Intention of Processed Food Products

“…Our results differ from other similar experimental studies, including some with children and adolescents, that have found that WLs usually dissuade consumers from purchasing foods high in critical nutrients and help in the identification of the healthiest products [5]. For example, a study with adolescents (16-18 years) in New Zealand found that the presence of octagon WLs significantly reduced the intention to purchase breakfast cereals of low nutritional value [26]. In Uruguay, a study involving children from 8 to 13 years found that two designs of WLs (the traffic light system and octagons) reduced the choice of products high in critical nutrients [15].…”

Are Front-of-Pack Labels a Health Policy Tool?

“…This is highlighted when FOPL understandability is not reflected in consumer choice, as in Fialon et al [39] and Vandevijvere S. [53]: they studied respectively a sample of Italian and Belgian subjects, and the Nutri-Score was found to be the best in helping consumer to categorize foods, but it was not associated with a shift in food choices between food categories. The same result was found in Hamlin et al (2020), where the HSR label was not associated with a change in breakfast cereal choice among adolescents [54].…”

“…A macro-simulation study that used the Preventable Risk Integrated Model (PRIME), estimated the impact of FOPLs on deaths from NCDs, suggesting that they could delay or prevent 3.4% of cases on average, with some differences between labels, and the greater results were achieved by Nutri-Score and HSR [83]. However, in different settings, HSR has been criticized for not being particularly useful in influencing consumer choice, especially in purchasing sugar-rich products [54].…”

Uptake of Australia’s Health Star Rating System 2014–2019

“…At the very least, this suggests that HSR’s real-world effectiveness is contingent on it providing accurate and visible information on unhealthy products for consumers. It also suggests potential for future research to explore how this HSR’s capacity to ‘steer’ consumers away from these products could be enhanced, for example by incorporating red colour into the HSR graphic of products that receive a low rating [ 26 , 27 ].…”